Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs Spirent Avalanche [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 22, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Professional Perfo...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (4th), Load Testing Tools (4th)
Spirent Avalanche [EOL]
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

SD
Assistant Consultant at Tata Consultancy
Experience a decade of seamless performance with robust support
I would like to improve OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on what we discussed in our last discussion, as those points remain similar and applicable. For future updates, I would like to see the same features that people generally prefer. I find that AI functionality in OpenText LoadRunner Professional should be improved and more accessible; if we get a chance to work with that, then we can check how much it helps.
reviewer1153692 - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Quality traffic testing and is reasonably priced
I find network traffic testing the most valuable feature The solution could improve by increasing the Gbps speeds and by having better support for storage. I have been using the solution for one and a half years. The price of the solution is reasonable. I rate Spirent Avalanche a nine out of…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs."
"I think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful."
"The number of protocols that it supports, and especially, for example, when it talks about SAP GUI-based performance testing."
"It is actually a very good tool because it will support almost all, if not all, industry-standard protocols, and it is also equipped with very nice reporting capabilities, which is why I like it."
"The solution is quite stable."
"I appreciate its ability to handle various internal calls and its user-friendly interface."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"Graph monitoring is a valuable feature."
"I find network traffic testing the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"The solution lacks some form of integration."
"The monitoring technology in LoadRunner could be improved. It depends on another tool called SiteScope, but they only took a part of the features of SiteScope. They need to improve on that."
"Instead of having too many graphs and tabs, use the analysis section to get a more simplified defect analysis."
"There's a reporting part of the cloud that could be improved a little bit."
"Sometimes when we were migrating from one version to another, some of our scripts started failing."
"Licensing costs could be reduced."
"The solution could improve by increasing the Gbps speeds and by having better support for storage."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost depends greatly on the needs of the testing engagement."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low and ten is a high price, I rate the solution a five."
"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
"When you compare the cost of other tools such as NeoLoad and LoadNinja, the cost of LoadRunner is on the expensive side. As a result, we are currently considering going with NeoLoad."
"It is a high-cost investment, particularly for companies with small budgets or limited testing needs."
"LoadRunner Professional's licensing costs are on the higher side, apart from the Community Edition."
"The licensing model is complex. You have to pick up the protocol and the number of concurrent users, and then select the level of concurrent users. For example, there would be one price for 100 to 500 users and another for 500 to 2000 users. If you choose two protocols, then you will have to pay twice the amount depending on the number of concurrent users."
"The fee for LoadRunner Professional is very high - about US$500 per user."
"The price of the solution is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Penetration and Neoload Tester at a university with 501-1,000 employees
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise66
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I have mentioned many advantages about this product, but to discuss disadvantages or areas that could be improved, I would need to consult with my engineers who are working on it. So far I have not...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
Avalanche
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
ditno
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.